RESUMO
BACKGROUND: In the past, a reduced length of postoperative hospital stay was considered a sufficient trade-off to refinance the additional costs associated with minimally invasive surgery; however, with the implementation of the Nursing Personnel Strengthening Act and disincorporation of nursing costs, this argumentation needs to be fundamentally reevaluated. METHOD: Using right-sided hemicolectomy as an example, a retrospective case analysis was conducted. Cost reductions associated with the length of hospital stay were compared before and after the introduction of the revised German diagnosis-related groups (aG-DRG) and offset against the increased material and personnel costs. RESULTS: Among the analyzed cases, the utilization of minimally invasive surgical techniques led to a substantial cost reduction per case compared to conventional surgical treatment. After the introduction of the aG-DRGs the financial benefits of a shortened hospital stay are greatly diminished and cannot be used to refinance the expenses necessary to perform minimally invasive surgery. From a strictly economical perspective, there is a strong incentive to only perform open surgical procedures. CONCLUSION: Disincorporation of nursing costs has destabilized the fragile concept of indirect refinancing of advanced operative techniques by the financial incentives associated with a shorter hospital stay. In order to comply with statutory regulations to implicate a performance-based funding, there is an urgent necessity to adjust the grouping algorithms for minimally invasive surgical procedures to the corresponding flat rates.